Search results for

Mian Muhammad Nazir From a shariah perspective, it is necessary that any dispute under a shariah-compliant contract must be resolved in accordance with the principles of shariah which govern the relevant shariah-nominate contract. This principle has been reiterated by International Fiqh Academy in its resolution on the subject of governing law for shariah-compliant transactions. Despite the resolution and the importance of the governing law for shariah-compliant transactions, the matter has not received any significant attention from stakeholders. The main reason why the parties are reluctant to choose the principles of shariah as governing law is uncertainty surrounding the recognition of principles of shariah as a system of law by judicial and quasi-judicial authorities and tribunals. Apparently, this indifference accorded to shariah is largely attributable to lack of understanding of the Islamic jurisprudence and its principles. It is often said – indeed it has become a cliché among the legal fraternity – that the principles of shariah are mostly a set of discretionary rules laid down or inferred by a scholar or a school of Islamic jurisprudence based on his or its understanding of Qur'an and Sunnah (the two main sources of Islamic jurisprudence). Surprisingly, this notion has received considerable strength from judgments in a few cases and arbitration proceedings in some jurisdictions. Unfortunately, the Islamic banking industry, which owes its genesis to Islamic jurisprudence, has not made any effort to dispel this misconception.

A first-of-its-kind private placement has linked US institutional investors with Brazil's project market – and revealed them to be a perfect a match.

Issuers must be a little less reserved Regulation S high-yield issuers in Asia should disclose information to a rule 144A standard and pay close attention to their email trails, lawyers have warned. Market participants predict regulation S high-yield deals to become more common over the next year. But it is expected that deals under rule 144A would eventually become the market standard.

UK lawyers have called for banks and law firms to consider recognising redenomination as a risk factor in deal documentation.

On July 20 2012, the Government of Vietnam promulgated Decree 58/2012/ND-CP, implementing a number of provisions on the Law on Securities. Decree 58 took effect on September 15 2012, replacing a number of legal instruments, including Decree 14/2007/ND-CP, Decree 84/2010/ND-CP and Decree 01/2010/ND-CP.

Few would name the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) as a class leading, benchmark-setting regulator when it comes to enforcement of the securities law. Over 90% of new cases launched against alleged violators are by way of administrative action, and the balance by way of criminal prosecution in courts. Sebi's perception as an effective regulator is often wrongly criticised. The criticism arises from two pieces of what's deemed as evidence. First newspaper reports which discuss the overruling of Sebi's administrative findings by the appellate authority. Second, the perception that Sebi brings too few people to book to be able to act as a disincentive to other wrongdoers.

Governments could have a tougher time agreeing restructuring plans with creditors following a landmark US court ruling on Argentina's sovereign debt default of 2001.

What does the Canadian government’s initial rejection of the Petronas/Progress deal signal for SOE investment, and Cnooc’s bid for Nexen?

The Panamanian bank has used a contractual structure to issue Latin America’s first cross-border covered bond

Structured products, securitisations and commodity pools must navigate a patchwork of Dodd-Frank regulations. But recent interpretive guidance means all is not lost